How to buy a suppressor in 2023 (commercial side)

[1168]

All of the above. The Flow 556k seems to be about the weight and size of the Sandman K with suppression performance better than the Sandman S. I think the compromise with the Flow 556k is the regular cleaning interval and it's a 556-specific design.

Better suppression than Sandman S?

I asked about your reasons for wanting the Flow, because there are some other cans in the size range of the Sandman K that sound better, but none are going to be as low backpressure as the Hux.

[georgeib]

Better suppression than Sandman S?

Yes, the Sandman S isn't really all that impressive compared to a lot on other cans. This shows a comparison of a few different suppressors on a MK18.

[1168]

No, the Sandman isn’t impressive, but keep in mind that Pew ratings are dosing guidelines, not decibels. With dosing, a shorter duration is favored over loudness sometimes, and flow through cans have a short duration because they don’t trap the gas as long.

I’m not particularly a Sandman fanboy, but I’d be surprised if a Sandman S with 5.56 cap did not have more performance than a Flow 5.56k in the real world, though with more backpressure. I’m still waiting on my buddy’s Flow 5.56k to clear before I can be sure of that via direct side by side comparison, though.

[georgeib]

No, the Sandman isn’t impressive, but keep in mind that Pew ratings are dosing guidelines, not decibels. With dosing, a shorter duration is favored over loudness sometimes, and flow through cans have a short duration because they don’t trap the gas as long.

I’m not particularly a Sandman fanboy, but I’d be surprised if a Sandman S with 5.56 cap did not have more performance than a Flow 5.56k in the real world, though with more backpressure. I’m still waiting on my buddy’s Flow 5.56k to clear before I can be sure of that via direct side by side comparison, though.

Good point. Still though, I suppose from a hearing protection perspective it makes sense that a slightly louder sound over a short duration is less damaging that a slightly quieter one over a comparatively longer duration. From a signature reduction standpoint, does that still hold true, or is it a matter of splitting hairs?

[1168]

From a signature reduction standpoint, no, absolutely not. The quieter can is quieter.

[223to45]

Well just got a email from Griffin about Suppressors to your door.

Apparently they got something setup, to get them delivered straight to you.



Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

[hi-wayman]

Well just got a email from Griffin about Suppressors to your door.

Apparently they got something setup, to get them delivered straight to you.

The may be going through Silencer Central. I haven't used them, but their business model seems to be making it easy by providing free NFA gun trusts and front door shipping to every state suppressors are legal.
They make their own suppressors but also sell 14 other brands.

As a side note, I used Silencer Shop in TX and it was easy then. This was before they had their kiosk system or Silencer Central was around.

[Defaultmp3]

From a signature reduction standpoint, no, absolutely not. The quieter can is quieter.

Not really. An objectively louder can can provide better signature reduction because signature reduction is subjective in many ways. A lower, but louder tone, can provide better signature reduction than a quieter, but sharper tone for most people.

There's also the question of visual signature reduction; flowthrough cans had a rep for having more of a visual signature, but I don't know if advances in the past few years have made that a moot point.

[pag23]

I just got a Sig SRDX for my 22LR stuff... There was a Sig promo for $200 off the suppressor and the range helped with the prints, paperwork and communicated with any questions.

It took about 180 days from buying it to getting the approval email and it's my first suppressor

[1168]

Not really. An objectively louder can can provide better signature reduction because signature reduction is subjective in many ways. A lower, but louder tone, can provide better signature reduction than a quieter, but sharper tone for most people.

There's also the question of visual signature reduction; flowthrough cans had a rep for having more of a visual signature, but I don't know if advances in the past few years have made that a moot point.

Ah yes, the old “its loud AF, but it’s got a pleasing tone” case.

A lower pitched tone does not make for greater signature reduction. At equal decibels, a lower freq travels further because it goes through things better. When someone with a loud stereo system rolls past your house with their windows down, what do you hear? Vocals or thump? See also 2 vs 4 stroke engines in modern enduro racing.


Don’t confuse signature reduction with a layer of ear protection for the shooter. Signature reduction is what the neighbors notice, or don’t. Or the enemy, in a military scenario.